Deis schools in Dublin

faughs

Hey all.. I am currently working as a sub in a Vec school in Dublin and managed to get 10 hours of my own by the end of last year. The principal has advised me to stay on as he likes me but cannot guarantee that I will have my own hours. I have been advised to send my CV to Deis schools around Dublin just incase it falls through. Can anybody tell me where I could possibly find a list of all DEIS schools in Dublin?? Thanks

Postgrad10

Hi,
There's a list on :
http://www.education.ie/home/home.jsp?pcategory=17216&ecategory=33128&language=EN

Good luck

Keep scrolling down, primary schools are on the first part then secondary

faughs

Ah brilliant. Thank you so much., I have been googling for ages to find this... cheers:D

Postgrad10

Someone had to email it on to me this time last year I take it your after the English jobs too, good luck

faughs

Yeah I have the dreaded History and English combo. This is my fourth year searching and it never gets any easier..

sitstill

faughs wrote: »

I have been advised to send my CV to Deis schools around Dublin just incase it falls through. Can anybody tell me where I could possibly find a list of all DEIS schools in Dublin?? Thanks

Why did the principal recommend DEIS schools in particular?

Postgrad10

Oh English and History- the subjects everyone complains about there being too many graduates off, even the teaching council I'm lucky with my second is a language but interviews are so hard to come by . Sounds like your principal is very impressed with you and will definitely keep you on if he can. Fingers crossed. I'd be very happy with ten hours myself!

faughs

It wasn't the principal that suggested the deis school idea. The principal told me to stay as a sub in the school and he would have something on the table for me in the next two years.. Hard to know if you can believe him though as a few people got their hours cut this year..

sitstill

OK then why are you only looking for DEIS schools?

Why not send to CVs to all sorts of schools, especially fee paying which can hire staff above their quota?

faughs

It is just because it is so expensive to send a CV to every school in Dublin through post so I have decided to limit it to Deis schools. That covers around 45. There is also a higher turnover rate of teachers in deis schools than others. Chances are I am going to be going back to my old place anyway but I do not want to hang around all summer waiting.

Fuinseog

faughs wrote: »

Hey all.. I am currently working as a sub in a Vec school in Dublin and managed to get 10 hours of my own by the end of last year. The principal has advised me to stay on as he likes me but cannot guarantee that I will have my own hours. I have been advised to send my CV to Deis schools around Dublin just incase it falls through. Can anybody tell me where I could possibly find a list of all DEIS schools in Dublin?? Thanks

DEIS schools are great if you have no self respect and do not mind being told to f off on a daily basis. should be easy find work there.

Postgrad10

Poor Fuinseog . You could be told to F off in any school though!
Faughs , email your CV to all the schools you can in Dublin. If no email address then post. Your four years experience will stand to you no matter where you apply.

implausible

Fuinseog wrote: »

DEIS schools are great if you have no self respect and do not mind being told to f off on a daily basis. should be easy find work there.

What an outrageous general statement about a large amount of education providers in this country and the staff who work in them!

Teachers in these schools work damn hard, probably harder than in 'good' schools. Education is not about churning out geniuses who get 600 points in the Leaving Cert; it's about providing an education to everyone, regardless of ability or background.

Self-respect must be cheap if you don't believe it can be gained by doing a good job that you love and believe in.

implausible

faughs wrote: »

The principal told me to stay as a sub in the school and he would have something on the table for me in the next two years.. Hard to know if you can believe him though as a few people got their hours cut this year..

You've a much better chance of a CID if you stay in the one school/VEC. Surely, you can ask him for more details about this "something on the table" - a possible retirement, increased enrolment?

faughs wrote: »

It is just because it is so expensive to send a CV to every school in Dublin through post so I have decided to limit it to Deis schools.

Unemployment can be expensive too!

Fuinseog

Postgrad10 wrote: »

Poor Fuinseog . You could be told to F off in any school though!
Faughs , email your CV to all the schools you can in Dublin. If no email address then post. Your four years experience will stand to you no matter where you apply.

your tone is very condesending, perhaps linked with a lack of experience. for the sake of the OP i will entertain it as it is important to know what you are letting yourself in for.

You can indeed be told to f off in any school, but the frequency in a deis school is much higher. there is also a mulititude of social problems.

There are recent graduates out there looking for a job and have no idea what deis is and often it is not mentioned in the interview.

there is a reason why there is a high turnover of staff.

Fuinseog

deemark wrote: »

What an outrageous general statement about a large amount of education providers in this country and the staff who work in them!

Teachers in these schools work damn hard, probably harder than in 'good' schools. Education is not about churning out geniuses who get 600 points in the Leaving Cert; it's about providing an education to everyone, regardless of ability or background.

Self-respect must be cheap if you don't believe it can be gained by doing a good job that you love and believe in.

its nothing to do with being poor or academically weak. I have worked with the latter and they have been lovely and I have worked in inner city schools where the pupils have a sense of entitlement and zero respect for anyone. Frankly,I would not wish an inner city school on anyone. If you are happy to work in one, then good for you.

2seats

Fuinseog wrote: »

its nothing to do with being poor or academically weak. I have worked with the latter and they have been lovely and I have worked in inner city schools where the pupils have a sense of entitlement and zero respect for anyone. Frankly,I would not wish an inner city school on anyone. If you are happy to work in one, then good for you.

you say students in DEIS schools have zero respect for anyone yet it seems you have zero respect for the teachers who work very hard in DEIS schools by saying they lack self confidence.

implausible

Fuinseog wrote: »

its nothing to do with being poor or academically weak. I have worked with the latter and they have been lovely and I have worked in inner city schools where the pupils have a sense of entitlement and zero respect for anyone. Frankly,I would not wish an inner city school on anyone. If you are happy to work in one, then good for you.

I think you'll find it has an awful lot to do with poverty! Have you any idea why a school is designated as DEIS?

I work in a DEIS school; it is as far from "inner city" as you can get. Go and look at the list.

gaeilgebeo

Fuinseog wrote: »

its nothing to do with being poor or academically weak. I have worked with the latter and they have been lovely and I have worked in inner city schools where the pupils have a sense of entitlement and zero respect for anyone. Frankly,I would not wish an inner city school on anyone. If you are happy to work in one, then good for you.

What a narrow-minded snobby attitude!
You also don't seem to have a good grasp of the criteria for a school to be awarded DEIS status.
I have worked in a really "good" school, where the students also had a great sense of entitlement because they were seen as an elite school.
They were highly demanding of both the teachers time both inside and outside of the classroom.
They had a sense that the teacher was there to work for them as opposed to teach them!

I have been working happily in a DEIS school for many years now, which is hours away from any "inner city".
I find the majority of students the opposite to how you've described.
Yes, teenagers can be stroppy and lack respect but that goes for teenagers in any school.
I find working in a DEIS school as a opposed to a "good" school, far more rewarding.
To see a disadvantage students face light up when you give them any bit of praise or a little reward for something is priceless.:)

You really have a lot to learn and I am hoping that your unjust views on DEIS schools are down to your lack of experience.

Postgrad10

Fuinseog wrote: »

your tone is very condesending, perhaps linked with a lack of experience. for the sake of the OP i will entertain it as it is important to know what you are letting yourself in for.

You can indeed be told to f off in any school, but the frequency in a deis school is much higher. there is also a mulititude of social problems.

There are recent graduates out there looking for a job and have no idea what deis is and often it is not mentioned in the interview.

there is a reason why there is a high turnover of staff.

Just to verify I was actually being nice to you.

Toto Wolfcastle

Alright, can we all calm ourselves down a bit here please? No need to get personal with each other.

faughs

My god this thread has got very touchy since I left. ha. I am working inner city deis at the minute and I absolutely love it. I spent the previous two years in a "good" school and I can tell you I would pick deis any day of the week.. Do you think schools would actually consider E-mailed CVs i am always under the impression that they wont print it out due to paper work involved so I always post mine. I know what you mean about cost but it is also tough to get around to sending CVs to every school in Dublin there are so many. Decided to stick with deis due to the high staff turnover.

gaeilgebeo

faughs wrote: »

My god this thread has got very touchy since I left. ha. I am working inner city deis at the minute and I absolutely love it. I spent the previous two years in a "good" school and I can tell you I would pick deis any day of the week.. Do you think schools would actually consider E-mailed CVs i am always under the impression that they wont print it out due to paper work involved so I always post mine. I know what you mean about cost but it is also tough to get around to sending CVs to every school in Dublin there are so many. Decided to stick with deis due to the high staff turnover.

Bear in mind the shortage of teaching posts and redeployment regardless of whether or not the school is DEIS or has a high turnover.
We have a high turnover in our school but in the past 2 years that turnover has been due to job losses and transfers!
I think you are cutting off your nose to spite your face by not applying to ALL schools.
Jobs are like gold dust at the minute. I know it is expensive sending out C.Vs but just because a school is DEIS does not heighten your chance of getting a job.
Best of luck with the job-hunt.

implausible

faughs wrote: »

Do you think schools would actually consider E-mailed CVs i am always under the impression that they wont print it out due to paper work involved so I always post mine. I know what you mean about cost but it is also tough to get around to sending CVs to every school in Dublin there are so many. Decided to stick with deis due to the high staff turnover.

If cost is an issue, it'd probably be cheaper to go round to the schools. It's also more personal and you've a better chance of getting talking to the principal.

When jobs were more plentiful, maybe people chopped and changed schools, but I doubt that's the case now. Teachers in all schools are hanging onto their positions for dear life. The only turnover in our school is teachers losing their jobs.

linguist

I think deemark has nailed the reality as things stand but I’d still like to respond to some of the issues raised in this thread.

I definitely don’t understand why anyone would restrict their job search to one kind of school. It doesn’t make any sense. If you’re tied to a particular geographical area that’s one thing, but it just doesn’t make any sense not to apply to all the schools in the areas you want to work in. Jobs can and will come up anywhere.

You’ll hear very differing accounts regarding the benefits of unsolicited applications. Generally speaking jobs will be advertised. It is true that from this September all schools have to keep a register of teachers available for substitution so your unsolicited CV would be useful for that purpose. From now on is the time to be seriously looking at the newspapers again.

I think the comment with regard to DEIS schools and self-respect was downright stupid. Teachers get jobs where they can and if anyone thinks that teachers in DEIS schools are in some way inferior to those in schools with fewer problems related to disadvantage, they frankly aren’t displaying the type of reason and judgement one might expect from somebody with a postgraduate level of education.

I want to address the question of fee-paying schools because the sands are shifting here and people need to keep up with developments.

Many of these schools (but not all) have experienced a decline in enrolment with the recession. The Government has also clearly indicated that it will not, in future, be giving these schools public monies for school buildings etc… Since Budget 2009, their pupil teacher ratio, as funded by the State, is 20:1 as opposed to 19:1 in the State sector. All of these things mean that jobs in fee-paying schools are a risky proposition at the moment.

Add to that some very important changes. A High Court ruling in the last year or so stated that fee-paying schools do not have to pay their teachers the same salary as teachers paid by the Department. Until 2010, privately-paid teachers in fee-paying schools could join the Department’s pension scheme. That door is now closed. Finally, a recent circular stated that any teacher working in a fee-paying school who subsequently gets a Department-paid post, and who has never previously been Department-paid, will be regarded as a new entrant. In other words, they will go back to point 1 of the pay scale but will get incremental credit.

Teachers really need to wise up to all these issues. Clearly, I would take a job in a fee-paying school ahead of being unemployed but I do think there’s a lot to be said for putting up with life in a State school (even a DEIS one!) for the small perks it gives you in terms of your financial security and long term prospects.

spurious

Let's not feed the trolls - and please, Fuinseog, don't even try to pretend you're not trolling. You tried it in the Dublin forum and it won't wash here.

Fuinseog

spurious wrote: »

Let's not feed the trolls - and please, Fuinseog, don't even try to pretend you're not trolling. You tried it in the Dublin forum and it won't wash here.

if you have nothing constructive to add do not feel the need to post any reply

killbillvol2

spurious wrote: »

Let's not feed the trolls - and please, Fuinseog, don't even try to pretend you're not trolling. You tried it in the Dublin forum and it won't wash here.

Fuinseog wrote: »

if you have nothing constructive to add do not feel the need to post any reply

He may not be trolling. You also have to look at the possibility that he's just a bigoted, ill-informed asshole.

(I hink it was worth a ban to get that off my chest).

Postgrad10

Right back to the topic Faughs was discussing. How about you send as many as you can by post depending on what part of Dublin you are living in. Then after that email the rest. If they do not have an email address, then post. And apply to those in any school that advertise. It would be brilliant if all schools went down the email application route:) The amount of paper that is wasted is ridiculous. I do think they should not request copies of qualifications until the interview stage too.

Toto Wolfcastle

Fuinseog infracted for arguing a mod warning on-thread. killbillvol2 infracted for abuse.

Other off-topic posts deleted.

Back on topic now please. Any further disruption will result in infractions/bans. Do not reply to this warning on thread.

born2bwild

deemark wrote: »

What an outrageous general statement about a large amount of education providers in this country and the staff who work in them!

Teachers in these schools work damn hard, probably harder than in 'good' schools. Education is not about churning out geniuses who get 600 points in the Leaving Cert; it's about providing an education to everyone, regardless of ability or background.

Self-respect must be cheap if you don't believe it can be gained by doing a good job that you love and believe in.

Nonsense. Education is about getting 600 points. Don't kid yourself; more importantly, don't kid your students. You don't have to be a genius to get 600 points but you do need teachers who accept and expect nothing less than academic excellence.

'Providing an education to everyone' sounds great but there is a real danger that that thinking results in a discourse and logic at individual and institutional level, that serve to lower the expectations of attainment all round.

I work in a DEIS school and there is an unspoken consensus that none if any of the students will go on to university.

Of course people work hard - very hard - all too often it's work on non- and extra- curricular programmes.

I have worked in DEIS and non-DEIS schools and, in my experience, you are far more likely to get told to fyck off in a DEIS school.

Fuinseog

born2bwild wrote: »

Nonsense. Education is about getting 600 points. Don't kid yourself; more importantly, don't kid your students. You don't have to be a genius to get 600 points but you do need teachers who accept and expect nothing less than academic excellence.

'Providing an education to everyone' sounds great but there is a real danger that that thinking results in a discourse and logic at individual and institutional level, that serve to lower the expectations of attainment all round.

I work in a DEIS school and there is an unspoken consensus that none if any of the students will go on to university.

Of course people work hard - very hard - all too often it's work on non- and extra- curricular programmes.

I have worked in DEIS and non-DEIS schools and, in my experience, you are far more likely to get told to fyck off in a DEIS school.

OMG, someone has semi agreed with me. They should be banned.

basically you can achieve what you want to achieve, but unfortunately there is a culture of excuses in schools at the moment. Low standards are accepted and the kids are not encouraged to work harder.

spurious

Fuinseog wrote: »

OMG, someone has semi agreed with me. They should be banned.
basically you can achieve what you want to achieve, but unfortunately there is a culture of excuses in schools at the moment.
Low standards are accepted and the kids are not encouraged to work harder.

By some teachers. Not by all, as this thread clearly (and thankfully) shows.

linguist

I work in a DEIS school and I can tell you that I am no soft touch when it comes to demanding standards both academic and behavioural.

But...education about getting 600 points? born2bwild, did you personally achieve that wonderful feat or are you, by your own standards, a failure?

The thing that I really can't fathom in this thread is that I am reading supposedly educated people saying things that have no place in informed discussion.

For what it's worth, I have plenty of misgivings about the discourse of educational disadvantage. I do think we have to stop making excuses for where kids come from and champion hard work and merit. Teachers have to promote staying in school and getting a Leaving Cert ahead of any other option and when kids say that their parents didn't finish their education we have to have the courage to champion our values over the legacy of underachievement in many of these communities.

However, we cannot expect the same outcomes in disadvantaged areas that we can in affluent ones. Who does the kid in Darndale or Ballymun ask for help with their Chemistry homework?

Our job, as teachers, is to get the very best result for every kid that we can and you really earn your money and your spurs doing that when battling severe social exclusion.

born2bwild

linguist wrote: »

I work in a DEIS school and I can tell you that I am no soft touch when it comes to demanding standards both academic and behavioural.

But...education about getting 600 points? born2bwild, did you personally achieve that wonderful feat or are you, by your own standards, a failure?

The thing that I really can't fathom in this thread is that I am reading supposedly educated people saying things that have no place in informed discussion.

For what it's worth, I have plenty of misgivings about the discourse of educational disadvantage. I do think we have to stop making excuses for where kids come from and champion hard work and merit. Teachers have to promote staying in school and getting a Leaving Cert ahead of any other option and when kids say that their parents didn't finish their education we have to have the courage to champion our values over the legacy of underachievement in many of these communities.

However, we cannot expect the same outcomes in disadvantaged areas that we can in affluent ones. Who does the kid in Darndale or Ballymun ask for help with their Chemistry homework?

Our job, as teachers, is to get the very best result for every kid that we can and you really earn your money and your spurs doing that when battling severe social exclusion.

Firstly, these are not my standards. These are the standards of the society we live in. The state examinations system rewards candidates for their efforts and this is a more or less accurate version of what happens thereafter. Society rewards those who achieve 600 points more than it rewards those who achieve 250 points.

250 points is not 'failure' (you notice that I have not used that word) - it is just less of a reward.

600 points means working as a doctor or barrister. 250 points means working in McDonald's. Don't for one minute think that that is MY design!

As teachers, we should be pushing students towards 600 points because anything else does not prepare students to live in this world.

As for the kids living in Darndale...we help them with their homework. We have to because the parents often cannot.

You asked about the results I got and you made comments regarding 'supposedly educated people'. I don't see how these ad hominem matters have any bearing on the discussion.

linguist

Does getting 600 points really prepare you to 'live in this world'? 600 points means that you achieved maximum points in your school leaving exams. That is the only valid extrapolation you can draw. Within that cohort, there will be people will a wide range of life skills, (social, emotional, entrepreneurial etc...) The recent arrival of the HPat tests for medical entry has brought into sharp focus the shortcomings of relying solely on achievement in one examination to find people who will make good doctors.

I know someone who got 480 points give or take. Thus he failed to get into medicine at LC level. He then went off and did another course in the science area, kept up a huge interest in all things medical and when he aced his degree (amazing given his modest Leaving Cert!), he was accepted to do medicine in the UK where he came in the top ten in his class. Meanwhile, a few of the people who got the points at Leaving Cert will have failed medicine!

Getting very high points in your LC gets you in the door of 'prestigious' courses, should you wish to do them. It is no guarantee as to your successful progress in your course or indeed as to your future success in life. Indeed, you often hear it said that employers snap up 2.1 graduates because they feel they will be more rounded than the 1.1s who maybe spent too much time in the library and too little gaining social and other skills.

Nobody here is disagreeing about pushing kids to the top. Rather, it is your view of what characterises success or otherwise that would be very likely to alienate the kid who is really trying to overcome disadvantage to be the best that THEY can.

born2bwild

linguist wrote: »

Does getting 600 points really prepare you to 'live in this world'? 600 points means that you achieved maximum points in your school leaving exams. That is the only valid extrapolation you can draw. Within that cohort, there will be people will a wide range of life skills, (social, emotional, entrepreneurial etc...) The recent arrival of the HPat tests for medical entry has brought into sharp focus the shortcomings of relying solely on achievement in one examination to find people who will make good doctors.

I know someone who got 480 points give or take. Thus he failed to get into medicine at LC level. He then went off and did another course in the science area, kept up a huge interest in all things medical and when he aced his degree (amazing given his modest Leaving Cert!), he was accepted to do medicine in the UK where he came in the top ten in his class. Meanwhile, a few of the people who got the points at Leaving Cert will have failed medicine!

Getting very high points in your LC gets you in the door of 'prestigious' courses, should you wish to do them. It is no guarantee as to your successful progress in your course or indeed as to your future success in life. Indeed, you often hear it said that employers snap up 2.1 graduates because they feel they will be more rounded than the 1.1s who maybe spent too much time in the library and too little gaining social and other skills.

Nobody here is disagreeing about pushing kids to the top. Rather, it is your view of what characterises success or otherwise that would be very likely to alienate the kid who is really trying to overcome disadvantage to be the best that THEY can.

I am not qualified to teach 'a wide range of life skills, (social, emotional, entrepreneurial'. That's not my job. Which is not to say that there aren't hordes of teachers who seem to think that such 'pastoral' guidance is within their remit. It's especially the case in DEIS school where the 'disdavantaged' label seems to give licence to people who want to 'teach' behaviour, life skills and so on.
I think the examinations system is the best thing about our education system - it's not perfect but it's very rigorous and it's very fair.

I would rather be operated on by a doctor with 600 points than 400 points.


600 points 'is no guarantee as to your successful progress in your course or indeed as to your future success in life' I seem to remember them telling me in the first week of the sociology of education course on the HDip and every inservice since that success in education means success in life.

I'm not sure that you're really saying that a 2.1 candidate is better than a 1.1 candidate...? Your point is that the student may be more rounded - but I return to central point I'm making: we are trained in academic disciplines and we are paid to bring students as close to 600 points as possible. We are not qualified and should not therefore take on the role of 'pastoral guide' especially in DEIS school where the stakes are much much higher.

We should not try to fill the gaps created by the range of inadequate home supports experienced by students from DEIS schools. The one thing that will make a difference in their lives is being taught how to get 600 points; not being taught how to be a well rounded person with 350 points.

gaeilgebeo

born2bwild wrote: »

I am not qualified to teach 'a wide range of life skills, (social, emotional, entrepreneurial'. That's not my job. Which is not to say that there aren't hordes of teachers who seem to think that such 'pastoral' guidance is within their remit. It's especially the case in DEIS school where the 'disdavantaged' label seems to give licence to people who want to 'teach' behaviour, life skills and so on.
I think the examinations system is the best thing about our education system - it's not perfect but it's very rigorous and it's very fair.

I would rather be operated on by a doctor with 600 points than 400 points.


600 points 'is no guarantee as to your successful progress in your course or indeed as to your future success in life' I seem to remember them telling me in the first week of the sociology of education course on the HDip and every inservice since that success in education means success in life.

I'm not sure that you're really saying that a 2.1 candidate is better than a 1.1 candidate...? Your point is that the student may be more rounded - but I return to central point I'm making: we are trained in academic disciplines and we are paid to bring students as close to 600 points as possible. We are not qualified and should not therefore take on the role of 'pastoral guide' especially in DEIS school where the stakes are much much higher.

We should not try to fill the gaps created by the range of inadequate home supports experienced by students from DEIS schools. The one thing that will make a difference in their lives is being taught how to get 600 points; not being taught how to be a well rounded person with 350 points.

I find your view on the whole "600 points in the Leving Cert" very narrow-minded and very black and white!
You've made the point about preferring a doctor with 400 points in the Leaving Cert as opposed to the one with 600.
I'm sure there were plenty of students who got hundreds of points more than I did in the Leaving Cert. Does that now make them better teachers than I am?

For you to base a persons intelligence/professionalism/work ethic/ability, solely on the points they got in the leaving cert is laughable.
Also, a student who attains 600 points may not be as "well-rounded" as someone who attained 350!
It goes without saying that for some students 600 points is unattainable, it doesn't make them any less of a "well rounded" person.
We teach students to aim for the best of their ability.

As for the "250 points students flipping burgers in McDonalds", I have taught many of students who got 250 or 150 points in the Leaving Cert who now run very successful businesses and are some of the most "well rounded" people I know.

School and education is not about 600 points for a lot of students.
Thankfully, most teachers I know don't have the same tunnel vision as you have shown in your post!
As for your point on pastrol care, well, the mind just boggles.

born2bwild

gaeilgebeo wrote: »

I find your view on the whole "600 points in the Leving Cert" very narrow-minded and very black and white!
You've made the point about preferring a doctor with 400 points in the Leaving Cert as opposed to the one with 600.
I'm sure there were plenty of students who got hundreds of points more than I did in the Leaving Cert. Does that now make them better teachers than I am?

For you to base a persons intelligence/professionalism/work ethic/ability, solely on the points they got in the leaving cert is laughable.
Also, a student who attains 600 points may not be as "well-rounded" as someone who attained 350!
It goes without saying that for some students 600 points is unattainable, (it was for me!), it doesn't make them any less of a "well rounded" person.
We teach students to aim for the best of their ability.

As for the "250 points students flipping burgers in McDonalds", I have taught many of students who got 250 or 150 points in the Leaving Cert who now run very successful businesses and are some of the most "well rounded" people I know.

School and education is not about 600 points for a lot of students.
Thankfully, most teachers I know don't have the same tunnel vision as you have shown in your post!
As for your point on pastrol care, well, the mind just boggles.

It's not 'my view' that 600 points in the Leaving gives you a better chance of making a decent life than getting 500 points. This is not a 'view' - it is a fact. There is no room to be narrow minded about this - reflect on the facts for a moment and you'll agree. I am describing the nature of the system that we are working within - it is a national competition for rewards that have a direct (not deterministic - and this is a key distinction) bearing on the quality of life that those taking part in the competition will experience.

The whole debate concerning 'well-roundedness' is, in my opinion, irrelevant to us as teachers. We are trained in academic disciplines - we are experts in narrow enough fields - but within those narrow fields we should do everything in our power to see to it that our students get as close as possible to 600 points.

As for intelligence, I never mentioned intelligence - I have had plenty of highly intelligent students who did very badly in the Leaving Cert. The state examination commission has the same reward for abstract 'intelligence' as it does for well-roundedness - nothing whatsoever.

As for 'tunnel vision' and 'narrow minded': I refer you to my previous comment regarding the irrelevance to this debate of ad hominem argumentation.

Regarding pastoral care: I intend 'pastoral' in the general sense of any tuition that is non-curricular. As a human being I will advise my students on any matters that may affect them - but I am not a parent, I am not a life coach, I am very humble, very careful and very hesitant to spend a lot of time in respect of anything outside of the curriculum. There are a lot of teachers in DEIS schools who spend more time on pastoral matters than they spend on the curriculum. That is a scandal.

gaeilgebeo

"There are a lot of teachers in DEIS schools who spend more time on pastoral matters than they spend on the curriculum. That is a scandal."

I was going to take time to reply to your post.
Then I saw this outrageous sweeping statement at the end.

born2bwild

gaeilgebeo wrote: »

"There are a lot of teachers in DEIS schools who spend more time on pastoral matters than they spend on the curriculum. That is a scandal."

I was going to take time to reply to your post.
Then I saw this outrageous sweeping statement at the end.

It's true. 'Sweeping'? Hardly. 'Outrageous'? The fact described by the statement is outrageous; the statement itself is not. Unfortunately it's true. I'm sorry about this, but there are 'a lot' of teachers who spend a lot of time on pastoral matters.
I don't know how else to put it.
I suppose I can temper what I say by this: there are a lot of teachers in DEIS schools who spend more time on the curriculum than they spend on pastoral matters. That is also true. Is it 'sweeping' and 'outrageous'?

implausible

born2bwild wrote: »

Nonsense. Education is about getting 600 points. Don't kid yourself; more importantly, don't kid your students. You don't have to be a genius to get 600 points but you do need teachers who accept and expect nothing less than academic excellence.

600 points is a measure of academic excellence in a state exam; it is not the definition of an education.

You may not have to be a genius, but you do need ability, support and motivation. Two of these are seriously affected by your social and economic circumstances. Kidding my students would be telling each one of them that they will get 600 and forcing them through a Higher Level course that they cannot follow. There is a middle ground between reality and having high expectations. It is possible to deal with both.

born2bwild wrote: »

I am not qualified to teach 'a wide range of life skills, (social, emotional, entrepreneurial'. That's not my job. Which is not to say that there aren't hordes of teachers who seem to think that such 'pastoral' guidance is within their remit. It's especially the case in DEIS school where the 'disdavantaged' label seems to give licence to people who want to 'teach' behaviour, life skills and so on.

We are not qualified and should not therefore take on the role of 'pastoral guide' especially in DEIS school where the stakes are much much higher.

We should not try to fill the gaps created by the range of inadequate home supports experienced by students from DEIS schools. The one thing that will make a difference in their lives is being taught how to get 600 points; not being taught how to be a well rounded person with 350 points.

I don't know how anybody survives in education with this attitude, because by your definition, when the students aren't getting 600 points, they are failing. Therefore, you feel that you are failing day in, day out, year after year.

Now, I may be idealistic and naive here, but I did not get into teaching merely to deliver material and have it parroted back to me. There is no joy in this. I am passionate about my subject and my students. This is what makes me a good teacher.

Like it or not, we often have more contact with kids than their parents or social workers do, in some cases the teacher might be the only stable influence in a student's life. It was the attitude of "it's not my job...." that facilitated the many terrible cases of misery inflicted on children by their parents and the church that have come to light lately.

I consider giving a sh1t to be firmly within my remit, but then again, maybe I'm just naive:rolleyes:

Fuinseog

gaeilgebeo wrote: »

"There are a lot of teachers in DEIS schools who spend more time on pastoral matters than they spend on the curriculum. That is a scandal."

I was going to take time to reply to your post.
Then I saw this outrageous sweeping statement at the end.

sure, he is probably trolling. is that not what you say to anyone who comes up with a different opinion to yours?
I think you find his statement offensive because it contain a strong element of the truth.

gaeilgebeo

Fuinseog wrote: »

sure, he is probably trolling. is that not what you say to anyone who comes up with a different opinion to yours?
I think you find his statement offensive because it contain a strong element of the truth.

Can you please quote where on this thread I have said someone is trolling?

born2bwild

deemark wrote: »

600 points is a measure of academic excellence in a state exam; it is not the definition of an education.

You may not have to be a genius, but you do need ability, support and motivation. Two of these are seriously affected by your social and economic circumstances. Kidding my students would be telling each one of them that they will get 600 and forcing them through a Higher Level course that they cannot follow. There is a middle ground between reality and having high expectations. It is possible to deal with both.



I don't know how anybody survives in education with this attitude, because by your definition, when the students aren't getting 600 points, they are failing. Therefore, you feel that you are failing day in, day out, year after year.

Now, I may be idealistic and naive here, but I did not get into teaching merely to deliver material and have it parroted back to me. There is no joy in this. I am passionate about my subject and my students. This is what makes me a good teacher.

Like it or not, we often have more contact with kids than their parents or social workers do, in some cases the teacher might be the only stable influence in a student's life. It was the attitude of "it's not my job...." that facilitated the many terrible cases of misery inflicted on children by their parents and the church that have come to light lately.

I consider giving a sh1t to be firmly within my remit, but then again, maybe I'm just naive:rolleyes:

Thanks for your response. Before I respond to you, I ask you to read closely what I write as I have done so with your post!

Firstly: never once did I use the words 'failing' 'failure' 'fail'. So put that to bed straight away.

Secondly: I have said this already but I'll repeat it: these are not 'my' standards, 'my' views and so on: the state examination commission objectively defines academic excellence to be A1 in any given subject. Our number one priority is to get students as close as possible to that.
Never once have I said that those not achieving A1 are failures: read what I've posted rather than what you may believe I have posted.
Of course, not every student will attain these marks: our duty is to ensure that the maximum success is achieved for every student. Should students not get A1; fine at least as a teacher you have tried.

Thirdly: Academic excellence is not having material 'parrotted' back at you - I believe that this is a straw man of some kind that bears no relation to anything I've posted. Who in their right mind believes that such a practice is acceptable?

Fourthly: of course as a teacher you have a lot of contact with kids: for many it may be the defining relationship in their lives. However, what we must not forget is this: that relationship is primarily a professional one; your absolute duty as a teacher is to assist the student to achieve academic excellence (as close as is possible for that student to A1 in your subject)

Fifthly: I am a little puzzled and alarmed by this: "the attitude of "it's not my job...." that facilitated the many terrible cases of misery inflicted on children by their parents and the church that have come to light lately". Perhaps I have not expressed myself clearly enough: When I say it's not my job to engage with students on matters external to the curriculum I mean that, while I very much, as you put it "give a sh1t", I can best help that student by doing my job properly: staying on task, on topic, working towards that student's version of academic excellence (as close to A1 as possible).

I am not counseller, I am not a parent, I am a tutor and a subject teacher and believe me, I take my responsibilities very seriously.

I am frankly alarmed by the assertion that clearly understanding the limits of one's professional relationship and devoting oneself to the pursuit of academic excellence as the core practice in that relationship could 'facilitate' 'cases of misery inflicted on children'. I argue that it would have the opposite effect.

At any rate, I find that rhetorical allusions to abuse tend to degrade the quality of debate, so let's not engage in that, shall we?

Finally: No-one said that you don't 'give a sh1t' - I think it is a given that you do. The fact that you're having this debate in the middle of your holidays testifies to that.

implausible

born2bwild wrote: »

Thanks for your response. Before I respond to you, I ask you to read closely what I write as I have done so with your post!

Firstly: never once did I use the words 'failing' 'failure' 'fail'. So put that to bed straight away.

Secondly: I have said this already but I'll repeat it: these are not 'my' standards, 'my' views and so on: the state examination commission objectively defines academic excellence to be A1 in any given subject. Our number one priority is to get students as close as possible to that.
Never once have I said that those not achieving A1 are failures: read what I've posted rather than what you may believe I have posted.
Of course, not every student will attain these marks: our duty is to ensure that the maximum success is achieved for every student. Should students not get A1; fine at least as a teacher you have tried.

The word 'failure' was not used but it was certainly implied in this statement:

born2bwild wrote: »

Nonsense. Education is about getting 600 points.

And obviously, you're right, these are the definitions of academic excellence according to the SEC, the CAO and the Department and we all, as teachers, subscribe to this view. However, where you and I differ is in the role of this academic excellence within an education. To me, they are not one and the same thing, academic excellence is part of an education.

Thirdly: Academic excellence is not having material 'parrotted' back at you - I believe that this is a straw man of some kind that bears no relation to anything I've posted. Who in their right mind believes that such a practice is acceptable?

The State Exams Commission. Because that is how you get your 600 points. Many subjects involve memorising large chunks of information and recalling them in a certain format to achieve 'academic excellence'.

Fourthly: of course as a teacher you have a lot of contact with kids: for many it may be the defining relationship in their lives. However, what we must not forget is this: that relationship is primarily a professional one; your absolute duty as a teacher is to assist the student to achieve academic excellence (as close as is possible for that student to A1 in your subject)

Of course it's a professional relationship, that goes without saying! However, taking an interest in the student's life, modelling good behaviour, modifying bad behaviour, offering advice and helping students overcome difficulties that hamper their progress is not unprofessional. All of these things help academic excellence and also teach them lessons needed for real life.

Fifthly: I am a little puzzled and alarmed by this: "the attitude of "it's not my job...." that facilitated the many terrible cases of misery inflicted on children by their parents and the church that have come to light lately". Perhaps I have not expressed myself clearly enough: When I say it's not my job to engage with students on matters external to the curriculum I mean that, while I very much, as you put it "give a sh1t", I can best help that student by doing my job properly: staying on task, on topic, working towards that student's version of academic excellence (as close to A1 as possible).

I am not counseller, I am not a parent, I am a tutor and a subject teacher and believe me, I take my responsibilities very seriously.

I am frankly alarmed by the assertion that clearly understanding the limits of one's professional relationship and devoting oneself to the pursuit of academic excellence as the core practice in that relationship could 'facilitate' 'cases of misery inflicted on children'. I argue that it would have the opposite effect.

At any rate, I find that rhetorical allusions to abuse tend to degrade the quality of debate, so let's not engage in that, shall we?

I am not taking emotional potshots by referring to the reality that every school in this country has dealt with children who have been abused or neglected by those close to them. Ignoring this reality and hoping that someone else will deal with it has not served us well in the past. I'm not going to get into anecdotes here, but many cases of abuse or neglect have been noticed by a teacher who spotted bruises, a child acting out of character, lack of personal hygiene or inappropriate behaviour. Noticing, inquiring, passing on information and being a person who students trust is not misunderstanding the professional limits of one's relationship. I am not a counsellor either and I would not take on that weighty role, but I am accessible to my students and often, that is all that is needed - one person who the student feels they can talk to and who understands him/her and who will communicate any issues of concern up the line to an expert. We all have a pastoral role, like it or not.

Finally: No-one said that you don't 'give a sh1t' - I think it is a given that you do. The fact that you're having this debate in the middle of your holidays testifies to that.

I didn't think anyone accused me of that. Giving a sh1t is my simplified definition of part my role as a teacher, making me one of the

hordes of teachers who seem to think that such 'pastoral' guidance is within their remit.

faughs

Back to the original purpose of the thread. Have spent all day doing up my cover letters and CV have 40 in their envelopes and ready to post. Any suggestions on when would be best time to post them?

born2bwild

faughs wrote: »

Back to the original purpose of the thread. Have spent all day doing up my cover letters and CV have 40 in their envelopes and ready to post. Any suggestions on when would be best time to post them?

A lot of principals take their holidays now - but that's no reason not to post them immediately!

born2bwild

deemark wrote: »

born2bwild wrote: »

The word 'failure' was not used but it was certainly implied in this statement:


And obviously, you're right, these are the definitions of academic excellence according to the SEC, the CAO and the Department and we all, as teachers, subscribe to this view. However, where you and I differ is in the role of this academic excellence within an education. To me, they are not one and the same thing, academic excellence is part of an education.



The State Exams Commission. Because that is how you get your 600 points. Many subjects involve memorising large chunks of information and recalling them in a certain format to achieve 'academic excellence'.


Of course it's a professional relationship, that goes without saying! However, taking an interest in the student's life, modelling good behaviour, modifying bad behaviour, offering advice and helping students overcome difficulties that hamper their progress is not unprofessional. All of these things help academic excellence and also teach them lessons needed for real life.



I am not taking emotional potshots by referring to the reality that every school in this country has dealt with children who have been abused or neglected by those close to them. Ignoring this reality and hoping that someone else will deal with it has not served us well in the past. I'm not going to get into anecdotes here, but many cases of abuse or neglect have been noticed by a teacher who spotted bruises, a child acting out of character, lack of personal hygiene or inappropriate behaviour. Noticing, inquiring, passing on information and being a person who students trust is not misunderstanding the professional limits of one's relationship. I am not a counsellor either and I would not take on that weighty role, but I am accessible to my students and often, that is all that is needed - one person who the student feels they can talk to and who understands him/her and who will communicate any issues of concern up the line to an expert. We all have a pastoral role, like it or not.


I didn't think anyone accused me of that. Giving a sh1t is my simplified definition of part my role as a teacher, making me one of the

I wouldn't be down on the SEC - it's rigorous and fair - not perfect - and I can tell you, as a state examiner of many years' standing, that unreflective regurgitation is not rewarded.

I never suggested that anyone should ignore warning signs of possible abuse. I did suggest that teaching is not keeping an eye out for abuse. teaching is helping children achieve academically. What you are describing is being a responsible, decent, law-abiding citizen of this republic - (check Enda Kenny's speech last week for elaboration)

Sure we have a pastoral role - any adult in a responsible relationship with a child has a duty of care. My problem is that there are a lot of teachers in DEIS schools who spend more time on pastoral matters than they do on curricular. Some teachers - like it or not - and I do not like it - are happy to work behind the smokescreen of statistics and socio-babble that apologises for low academic achievement in DEIS schools while they engage in pursuits that have nothing to do with the core activities of teaching.

I wish I could give you concrete examples: your brain would boil to see the extent to which this pastoral obsession blights the life chances of kids in schools I have worked in.

gaeilgebeo

born2bwild wrote: »

deemark wrote: »

I wouldn't be down on the SEC - it's rigorous and fair - not perfect - and I can tell you, as a state examiner of many years' standing, that unreflective regurgitation is not rewarded.

I never suggested that anyone should ignore warning signs of possible abuse. I did suggest that teaching is not keeping an eye out for abuse. teaching is helping children achieve academically. What you are describing is being a responsible, decent, law-abiding citizen of this republic - (check Enda Kenny's speech last week for elaboration)

Sure we have a pastoral role - any adult in a responsible relationship with a child has a duty of care. My problem is that there are a lot of teachers in DEIS schools who spend more time on pastoral matters than they do on curricular. Some teachers - like it or not - and I do not like it - are happy to work behind the smokescreen of statistics and socio-babble that apologises for low academic achievement in DEIS schools while they engage in pursuits that have nothing to do with the core activities of teaching.

I wish I could give you concrete examples: your brain would boil to see the extent to which this pastoral obsession blights the life chances of kids in schools I have worked in.

And I can tell you as a state examiner of many years too, that unreflective regurgitation is rewarded.
How many times do you see reamed off answers in exams, or 30 students in a class with very similar learned off answers/essays?
I don't know what subject you correct, but to say that regurgitated answers are not rewarded is untrue.
I'm not saying this is ideal, but it is a reality.

Born2bwild you have such strong views on pastoral care, can you not think of any examples where a teacher spent more time on pastoral care than on the curriculum?
Funnily enough, a lot of the serious pastoral care given in my own school is out of the teachers timetabled hours, given during free classes/lunchtime etc...

implausible

born2bwild wrote: »

I wouldn't be down on the SEC - it's rigorous and fair - not perfect - and I can tell you, as a state examiner of many years' standing, that unreflective regurgitation is not rewarded.

I never suggested that anyone should ignore warning signs of possible abuse. I did suggest that teaching is not keeping an eye out for abuse. teaching is helping children achieve academically. What you are describing is being a responsible, decent, law-abiding citizen of this republic - (check Enda Kenny's speech last week for elaboration)

Sure we have a pastoral role - any adult in a responsible relationship with a child has a duty of care. My problem is that there are a lot of teachers in DEIS schools who spend more time on pastoral matters than they do on curricular. Some teachers - like it or not - and I do not like it - are happy to work behind the smokescreen of statistics and socio-babble that apologises for low academic achievement in DEIS schools while they engage in pursuits that have nothing to do with the core activities of teaching.

I wish I could give you concrete examples: your brain would boil to see the extent to which this pastoral obsession blights the life chances of kids in schools I have worked in.

There are a lot of other experienced examiners who post on this forum who would disagree with you, including myself. Each student's work must be marked on its own merits, and in English, if that essay is the same as the previous student's, but it answers the question asked, it gets the marks. The system is far from perfect as a measure of excellence, but in its goal of producing a set of measurable and comparable results, it is fair.

Of course, we all aspire to being decent, law-abiding citizens. But, we, as teachers, need to be more than that. The reality is that we are in daily contact with vulnerable people and are in a good position to pick up warning signs. We should not require a law or mandatory reporting to compel us to be decent citizens and human beings.

You seem to regard time spent on pastoral care as a negative. I firmly disagree. Students need to come into a safe supportive environment. If that is the only thing we provide, then that is something positive. Getting good exam results is an added bonus. The student who attends most days, whose behaviour improves as the year goes on and who attains a level of education needed to function in our society and a certificate to prove it, is a success.